CBDT issued fresh advisory in form of "Frequently Answered Question" regarding implementation of N.R. Parmar decision of the Supreme Court. This advisory, issued by HRD is in concurrence with DOPT and thus it will override the earlier advisory issued by CBDT dated 29th Sep'14.
Viewers are requested to go through the detailed advisory and provide their valuable opinion in this regard.
Click Here to view the advisory.
Viewers are requested to go through the detailed advisory and provide their valuable opinion in this regard.
Click Here to view the advisory.
26 comments:
Friends, nowadays almost everybody is having double or tripple charges....there is no limit to assigning the charges. It can be any 02,03 or may be even 10. there is no policy on this. what ITEF is doing about this. This is becoming a serious problem for all. let us all take this matter to ITEF superemos. The senior officers also don't give their ears to this.
Na nau mann tel hoga na radha nachegi.
DPCs 24.11.2014 tak review hongi nahin or bahanebazi shuru ho jaegi.
Uppar wala hi bachaey ess sabse
ITEF ITEF ITEF ITEF
where is fedrration which we joined when we joined service. This itef chq is a bunch of people who betrayed from every promise of his own. This is not income tax employees federation which stoodby for welfare of aam members. Now it is "Inhuman Torture to Employees Federation" in the hands of one chq leader at delhi. Who everytime busy in planing that how he could give maximum dent to senior employees except one cadre.
The advisory instructions are silent on the cadre of stenos. How to deal with stenographer seniority. Officials rendered service in other departments should also governed by n r Parmar decision, it is not correct that the said issue was not there before SC
and the said issue cannot be governed by separate instructions
Why n r Parmar not applicable to stenographer when there is direct recruitment of grade iii and Grade I. also the services rendered in other departments should also be covered by n r Parmar decision and it should not be governed by separate instructions. Take the said suggestions into consideration please.
After so much halla gulla what a waste decision
CBDT should have given clear directions about implementation of the case in the cadres of Stenos and LDCs. Because some of the Stenos and LDCs were placed behind those employees who came on inteer-charge between Year of Vacancy and Year of joining. If the DRs are given seniority from the year of vacancy by implementing Parmar case in these cadres also, there will not be any chance for litigation by those DRs.
why the Parmar decision is not applicable to stenographers..who r working in this deptt... when stenos r recruited. by direct recruitment of grade iii..... It is not good order.... It is partiality with stenos.... Take the said suggestions into consideration please.
It is applicable to all DR cadres, including ITI, TA, UDC, LDC & stenos.
intercharge will be below all DR and PR in any particular Recruitment year. As such in Bihar cadre also TAs who joined in the year 2007-08 was actually be required to placed in R.Y. 2006-07 i.e. from the date of requisition of vacancies 20.02.2007 and all intercharge officials are required to place below these officials in the seniority list. Then a review DPC is required for in the cadre of Sr. T.A. for fixing there fresh seniority ie.. above all intercharge ( At present they are above all T.A. joined in the R.Y. 2007-08. It time to come into action for all those affected official to bring notice to the administration above it.
All stenos in d the deptt should be upgraded to IRS cadre directly becoz they are very brillient people and are highly qualified and no other employee of the d matches their qualifications.
Not only inter charge, compassionate grounds and sports quota also. So, _NRP should be implemented for LDC & stenos also. In one department all cadres should have same treatment. It has to be assured by the CBDT. ITEF must take immediate necessary steps for implementing the same before 24.11.2014.
another advisory needed, specially DR ITI of 95 exam who joined in 1997-98 will be assigned seniority of 99-2000 as per this advisory.Is it acceptable and justice as per sprit of Honble SC In NRP?
Dr ITI of 95 issues solve ho chuka hai
Is it possible to implement nrp advisory throughout India right from the cadre of Peon to ACIT for the last 30 years especially when a major part of employees have retired or some have expired. What purpose would it serve to fix their seniority. What would be the fate of those employees who have won court cases and already got their seniority fixed as per some other norms. It appears that hrd advisory is ill motivated because only dopt can issue notifications and om.
In the law laid down in the case of The Direct Recruit Class-II Engineering Officers Association and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (supra), one of the preposition laid down was that it was not in the interest of service to settle the unsettled position. The applicant had not disputed his seniority in the seniority lists of 1987 and 1989 which were circulated nor had the sought legal remedy at that point of time. Seniority lists of 1983 as well as of 1987 and 1989 cannot be challenged after a lapse of so many years. As laid down by their Lordships of the Apex Court in K.R. Mudgal and Others v. R.P. Singh and Ors., 1986 (4) SCC 531, "it is essential that anyone who feels aggrieved by the seniority assigned to him should approach the Court as early as possible as otherwise in addition to the creation of a sense of insecurity in the minds of the Government servants there would also be administrative complications and difficulties." Their Lordships have further referred to the observations made by Constitution Bench of that Court in Malcom Lawrence Cecil D'Souza v. Union of India which are reproduced below :
"Although security of service cannot be used as a shield against section for lapses of a public servant, by and large one of the essential requirements of contentment and efficiency in public services is a feeling of security. It is difficult no doubt to guarantee such security iin all its varied aspects, it should at least be possible to ensure that matters like one's position in the seniority list after having been settled once should not be liable to be reopened after lapse of many years at the instance of a party who has during the intervening period chosen to keep quiet. Raking up old matters like seniority, after a long time is likely to result in administrative complications and difficulties. It would, therefore, appear to be in the interest of smoothness and efficiency of service that such matters should be given a quietus after lapse of some time."
N R Parmar decision is useful only to the cadre where PR quota is high and selection process takes time of 2-3 years. In steno no promotion quota and in LDC only 10% promotion quota. This 10% is also vacant normally due to ineligible group D availability for promotion. Friends, ITEF has created unnecessary pressure on CBDT and has thrown an axe on the legs of LDCs. You all should need to first understand Rota Quota system and DOPT OM of 1959 and 1986. Now nothing can be done and UDCs will get seniority over LDCs...
Bhai, there is small line between Settled Seniority and NRP. In my opinion CBDT has made alive the issue of interpretation of 1986 OM which it fought at the level of Supreme Court. Hence. the seniority was not settled with reference to issue of interse seniority governed by 1986 OM. Yes, it is true that this decision of implementing in UDC cadre is harmful to LDC and which could be easily avoided. Even CBDT also issued first advisory to Inspectors only to avoid much disturbance in seniority positions but ITEF created unwanted pressure for UDCs.Now no court will do anything and UDC will get benefit....
Kaise ? NRP decision 2012 me asyaa hai 1995 me nahi
Dear Ananymous November 9, 2014 at 9:00 PM
How matter of DR ITI of 95 solved . Please explain.
Shambo shiv shiv shambo........
NRP Govindha..... Govindha.......
By the time the CCIT CCAs revise the seniority of all the cadres, all DRs will get promoted by that time in normal seniority. Waste of our money spent to lawyers.
As per court's interpretation, seniority list once published is treated as settled which cannot be unsettled after long years. 30 years is too long a period. ITEF has good reason for treating all cadres at par.
DR ITIs should be given seniority from the night of their parents honeymoon . This would ensure correct implementation of JAGADGURU PARAMPUJYA PARMARJI
Rather d the DR ITI should be given seniority from the date of engagement of thier parents.But in this fight of seniority we should not forget the sacrifices made by the stenos they have served d deptt with tan man dhan.
Looks like another idiotic DR ITI. corrupted frustrated soul. Dreams to become CIT "ek din". Langoor dreaming of becoming tiger.
Friends, one of the member said implementation of NRP is harmful to the cadre of LDC. If you see in that perspective then I would say implementation of NRP in Inspectors cadre has finished the carrier of DR UDC especially of the batches 94,95,96....Since NRP is apex court decision it has to apply to direct recruits like UDC.
Post a Comment